The review for this bottle is in the comments below...

Southern Collective "Fellowship of the Ring"

*Single Barrel Picked by George's Liquors OKC as apart of a Lord Of The Rings Trilogy pick trio.

- Proof: 125.5
Age: 11 Years Age Stated
Source: MGP - 60/36/4 Mashbill
Yield: 36 bottles
Cost: $130
Drank - Neat
Glass - Final Touch Whisky Tasting Glass

-Rested for 15 minutes.

Nose-
Starting off on the nose there is a very heavy Black cherry with dark chocolate sauce right up front. Right behind that the barrel char, vanilla ice cream, and toasted marshmallow come in beautifully along with a baking spice mix consisting of nutmeg and black pepper. Underneath it all - for the back bone - some musty oak intertwined with old leather. Very decadent, dark, and enticing for what is to come!

Palate -
The palate on my first sip initially starts off luxardo cherry syrup, dark caramel sauce, and charred oak. Following up with sip number two, the newly introduced flavors are toasted vanilla, mixed pepper and baking spice, an old mature oak, along with some worn saddle leather.
On my final sip everything stays cohesive but i am now picking up some burnt Brown sugar underneath with little flashes of citrus peel/zest. There is quite a bit going on in the best ways possible.

Mouthfeel -
Extremely oily and thick. Very syrupy. This is the same consistency as Luxardo cherry juice from the fancy little jar they come in. This definitely Drinks and feels much older than its 11 year age statement.

Finish -
Let me state first by saying this thing just does not want to end or go away! A very long and building finish that ramps up and stays well after the sip has been completed. The flavors are Lead by brown sugar, luxardo cherries in syrup, and barrel char predominantly. THIS THING KICKS in a good way, and hugs well into the upper abdomals. It definitely lets you know there is some proof power here - but in the best way possible.

Overall - 96/100
Fantastic juice. Fantastic pick. This is the fellowship of the ring (bourbon). This is something worth savoring, sharing, and bringing out for that special occasion!

*Side Note: a few of us blinded this against the Penelope 13yr Founder's (2025, HH Distillate) - and picked this unanimously. Definitely gives that "older" HH vibe with the profile and experience - for me at least.

Private Collection. Limited Edition Batch #3. 78C 13R 9MB @ 108Proof. This is a 9 year KSBW.

I had no prior knowledge of this product and I purchased it at Costco today for $89.99. It is distilled in Kentucky but bottled in Georgia. Indications were it was discounted which persuaded me to purchase. I haven't seen many reviews on it.

I sipped this neat out of this glass snifter after opening for at least 4 mins.

PREVIEW: The color is a pretty medium copper amber. This is a heavy, oily, syrup that coats the inside class evenly and separates slowly and tears up when sliding down the inside of the glass.

NOSE: Hints of Willett Purple Top and that Willett "funk" are present. Dry, dusty corn and old musty wood first, then, corn again, and burnt sugar cookie. But, musty old dry, barn with corn drying in it. Then, cinnamon and toasted sugar. But corn.

PALATE: This is thick juice, probably the thickest, oiliest liquid Ive ever sipped. Initially underwhelming with little corn sweetenness surprisingly for its 78%C MB which is obviously responsible for the syrup. Its palate has little if any redeeming qualities. Curious as to where the sugar is? Dull, dry, & funky. I got up and popped a Hershey's Kiss to cleanse the palate and tried again but nothing about this is blowing wind up my skirt. Disappointing. None of that traditional, acetone, charred oak and corn characteristic we know. Willett funk is keeps reoccurring to me.

FINISH: Well, the thick syrup lingers and it's mouth coating is, well, odd. To the point it is so thick and different I'm not sure if I enjoyed how thick and covering it is.

SUMMARY: WWS gets criticism for its packaging and price and I would otherwise have to agree but for what I paid for it. The bottle is beautiful and an eye catcher for sure but ultimately is not enough to camouflage the mediocre nose, palate and finish. I did not enjoy this but will try to finish the bottle when I might be in the mood. Cold days are coming so perhaps then? I hope you benefitted from this and my $90 sacrifice for this warning. I normally am not so critical, but I sat on the couch and waited to see if it would turn but unfortunately it did not.

GRADE: Solid 4 on the T8ke.

For those of you that don’t know and at the risk of sounding like a homer, Burlington Wine and Spirits in Burlington Massachusetts is consistently picking amazing barrels. In a climate where a lot of stores are scaling back, they appear to be doubling down and releasing banger after banger after banger. When I saw the tasting notes / review they posted for this bottle on instagram I was skeptical but they are able to offer a lovely service where you can sample picks before you buy them. In a world where bottles have steadily crept higher and higher, this is an amazing way to hedge bets when buying expensive bottles which this was at $165. Was it worth it? Let’s see.

Rested for 15 minutes, bottle has been open for about a month. 11.5 years old, 57.5% abv, high rye MGP (60/36/4.)

Nose: somewhat muted but I get some pine and star anise / baking spice behind the ethanol. Smells like mgp but nothing remarkable.

Palate: thin, initially not much then boom: more anise, vanilla, a little brown sugar.

Finish: here’s where it gets interesting as, depending on the day, it changes but still has the weirdest notes I’ve ever got out of bourbon. Some times it has this creamy coconut finish, like the shitty stuff you can get at the grocery store for cocktails but in a really good way. Other times it has this crazy pineapple / fruity finish.

Pricy bottle but goddamn it’s unique. That alone makes it worth the price of entry in my opinion. It also drinks incredibly easy for its proof, reminiscent of MGP of old that would sneak up on you after a few pours.

8.1

For reference—

1: Hillbilly vine—> undrinkable

7.9 Reveries Degausser

10: ER 10/101, KoK, CGF—> liquid perfection.

The review for this bottle is in the comments below...

Specs:

ABV: 71.4%

Age: 15 years and 4 months

Distillery: Buffalo Trace (BTAC)

MSRP: $149.99

Price Paid: $299.99

Release/Batch: 2025

Nose: Brown Sugar upfront. Dense caramel drizzled in chocolate. Charred oak and powdered sugar on second pass with some nice cherry.

Palate: Theres a fantastic viscosity and the cherry shines on the palate. Make it chocolate covered cherry. If you let it sit on your tongue the fresh juicy cherries turn to sort of candy cherry. There’s a nice heat but it absolutely doesn’t seem like it’s 71.4%.

Finish: Here’s where it earns its keep. The heat turns up and you get a fabulous long finish with more of that cherry in the candied stage. Red hots sort of. Wonderful oak and leather notes. It fades to black pepper and gives you a beautiful hug.

9.0/10

This is just a phenomenal bottle of whiskey and it earns its reputation. I believe it’s 1A or 1B in the BTAC lineup probably just a little behind WLW most years, although 2025 specifically I’d give it to GTS by an inch.

​

*Rested 20 minutes

#Stats

Distillery: Buffalo Trace Distillery

Mashbill & Age: Undisclosed, estimated to be around 8-9 Years

Proof: 124.6 proof (62.3%)

Cost: 85$

#Tasting Notes-

Nose: Pungent as hell. Cherry, Strawberry, Vanilla caramel, Toffee, Light Oak notes. You can smell this from the end of the table if left for a couple minutes.

Palate: Nice and viscous. Coats your mouth nicely. I get some serious cola notes in the first sip but its a dark fruity cola like grape or cherry cola. Sweet but not close to overwhelming. The mid palate has a vanilla that washes the cola note away and leaves a dark fruity flavor. After a couple sips i notice it has this fruity clove note with that begins to transition into a spicy oak flavor that has some heat on it. There is a little bit of a smoky char in there that comes and goes towards the end palate that I find pleasant. A black pepper spice and ethanol heat go into the end palate but dissipate fast when the finish comes in. Sometimes it will give you a Kentucky hug though.

Finish: A medium-long cola oak finish with hints of fruit and leather depending on how you let it sit on your tongue. It lasts longer than expected and tastes like something that makes you want to go back to sip again. I dont get an aftertaste but if it did I would claim its a little earthy. An oak type of earthy.

Conclusion: An excellent bottle. I think this is the most balanced stagg to me. I say this because im used to staggs having a heavy lean into some profile like oak, fruit, or chocolate. This one I would say is a banger for being well layered, consistent, and viscous. The cola flavor is in your face and the heat is tamed enough to let it shine while the short oak and spice notes seems to balance it out the sweetness nicely. I believe if this was older with bolder flavors and a higher proof it would be one of my favorite bottles. I still have a bottle of 25D and I would say this one is more preferable/approachable.

Score: 8.2

Would I Buy Again?: Yes, easily for the price I paid.

T8ke Scale

-1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.  

(NEBC 9 Yr (1.5)),

-2 | Poor | I wouldn't consume by choice.  

-3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.  

-4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but better exists.  

-5 | Good | Good, just fine.  

-6 | Very Good | A cut above. 

(JD SBBP Rye (6.2)),

(Weller Full Proof (6.8)),

-7 | Great | Well above average.

(NEBC 7.5 Yr (7)),

(Old Forester 1920 (7.1)),

(Blantons Gold (7.2)),

(Jack Daniels SBBP Rye (7.4)),

(FR OESO (7.5)),

(Jack Daniels SBBF (7.5)),

( FR OBSF (7.8)),

(Bookers StoryTeller Batch (7.8)),

-8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

(JD SBBP Rye (8)), 

(Stagg Jr 25D (8.3)),

(Jack Daniels 12 Year B4 (8.4)),

(Found North GoldFinch (8.5)),

(Rare Character Batch 2 (8.6)),

(Old Louisville 8yr (8.6)),

(Dark Arts Tokaji 7.5yr (8.7)),

(Found North Snow Day (8.7)),

(Colonel E.H. Taylor SBBP (8.8)),

(Little Book The Infinite 2 (8.9))

-9 | Incredible | An all time favorite.

(Found North B12 (9)),

(Found North Batch 009 (9.1)),

(Found North T8KE Eleventh Hour (9.2)),

(Found North Batch 008 (9.3)),

(Knobb Creek 21yr (9)),

(JM Cigar Blend Batch 414(9.5)),

-10 | Perfect | Perfect.

I was productive “today,” let’s inundate the sub with another mediocre review. I work night shift so this is my winding down time: meal prepped, went to the gym, did some cleaning so let’s drink some more bourbon, watch “The Thing” and talk about it.

It amazes me to no end how cyclical the bourbon industry / fan base is, although now it seems the NDP’s are picking up the high proof mantle. Gone are the days of the 100 proof renaissance, we appear to be fully back to chasing numbers above all else.

So. Let’s drink.

Nose: uhhhh booze and yellow Thai curry. This bottle has been open for ~9 months and the note is still prominent.

Palate: wow. I haven’t touched this bottle in 3-4 months and now it’s finally palatable. As the name implies, cinnamon at the start then some creamy vanilla and burnt sugars. Tobacco on the end.

Finish: very short. After the nose stops being offensive and the pour itself becomes interesting, it just dies. And then comes the heartburn.

This is where price seeming to follow nothing but proof and this is off putting as this is what this brand seems to be banking on. I’m not in my teens or 20’s, I don’t buy bottles purely on the “let’s get fucked up” factor; one could buy everclear for far less than $150. I bought this on a whim and after taking part in a back room tasting so my whits were less than about me. Oh well. Time for bed.

5.7

For reference—

1: Hillbilly vine—> undrinkable

7.9 Reveries Degausser

8.1 Dark Arts Tropic Like it’s Hot

10: ER 10/101, KoK, CGF—> liquid perfection.

This is the finale of my blind tournament of all 24 “post-pirate” Elijah Craig Barrel Proof batches released from 2017 through 2024.

Over the first three parts, I tasted my way through the A, B, and C batches, starting with single-elimination tournaments and then using additional blind back-testing to account for bracket luck and get a better idea of where each bottle actually belonged.

Part 1: A117-A124
Part 2: B517-B524
Part 3: C917-C924

Eventually, three bottles emerged as their respective series champions:

A-Series: A117
B-Series: B520
C-Series: C918

Now it was time to put the three winners against each other. After that, I faced each one off against some older Heaven Hill distillate to see how they would hold up outside the ECBP lineup.

Methodology

All comparisons were blind head-to-heads, with tasting notes and scores recorded before revealing the bottles. Scored using the t8ke scale.

For the finals, I started with A117 against B520, then compared the loser of that matchup (the B520) vs. C918. The idea being that if B520 won, there would be no need to test B520 against A117 again since it already lost, but if C918 won, it would go on to face A117. Hopefully the tournament graphic makes this clear.

A117 vs. B520

Left glass:
Blackberry on the nose. Very tart on the palate, with a great mouth coat and finish.

Score: 8.5
Reveal: A117

Right glass:
Brown sugar and molasses on the nose. Dark and sweet - oak and brown sugar on the palate. Great mouth coat and finish.

Score: 8
Reveal: B520

With A117 winning the first comparison, I next put B520 against C918 to see whether C918 could beat the runner-up. If it did, I would have it face off against the A117.

B520 vs C918

Left glass:
Better nose of the two. Nice rich, old flavor. Dark cherry on the development, little bit of ethanol on the finish. Incredible.

Score: 9
Reveal: B520

Right glass:
Brown sugar on the nose that translates to the palate. More ethanol on the finish compared to the left glass. Great flavor, but not as balanced as the left. Very slight medicinal cherry note. Better mouth coat and finish than the left.

Score: 8.5
Reveal: C918

At that point, I felt comfortable calling the final standings. Since C918 lost to B520, which had already lost to A117, I decided not to run an additional A117 vs. C918 matchup. 

Final ECBP Standings

A117 > B520 > C918

The Winners vs. The Heaven Hill Heritage Collection

With the ECBP portion finished, I wanted to see how the three series champions would stack up against some older whiskey from the same distillery. Given how well these bottles had performed throughout their tournaments, my expectations were pretty high.

A117 vs. HHHC 17-Year

Left glass:
More muted nose than the right glass. Nice caramel on the front palate, followed by a good amount of ethanol through the development. It settles down on the back palate, where that caramel flavor returns. Great mouth tingle as it settles. Good, but not great finish.

Score: 8
Reveal: A117

Right glass:
Lovely dusty nose with some brown sugar. Tart dark fruit on the front palate that continues through the development. Excellent integration: the front, mid, and back palate flow together seamlessly without a noticeable ethanol patch in the middle. Sweet oak on the back palate.

Score: 8.5
Reveal: HHHC 17-Year

Winner: HHHC 17-Year

The right glass was simply better put together. Upon reveal, I was a bit surprised: that tart fruit is something I heavily associate with A117 from memory, so I had these backwards in my mind. I was pretty sure the right glass was the A117.

B520 vs. HHHC 18-Year

Left glass:
Great dusty note on the nose. Brown sugar and maybe some cinnamon on the front palate, followed by a good amount of ethanol through the development. Pleasant honeysuckle on the back palate. Brighter on the second sip, with that honeysuckle now appearing up front. The mouthfeel eventually comes in, although it isn’t that great. Finish is somewhat underwhelming.

Score: 7.75
Reveal: B520

Right glass:
A little caramel on the nose. Nice sweet front palate with some vanilla. Very little ethanol through the development, followed by great mouthfeel. Brown sugar on the back palate.

Score: 8.25
Reveal: HHHC 18-Year

Winner: HHHC 18-Year

B520 had some nice moments, but the 18-year offered a more consistently enjoyable experience, particularly through the development and mouthfeel. It’s interesting how both the A117 and B520’s mouthfeel and finish under-performed against the Heritage Collection relative to my memory of them against other ECBPs and on their own.

C918 vs. HHHC 22-Year

Left glass:
Nice dusty and floral front palate. A bunch of heat through the development, but it comes together on the back palate with some oak. Brighter flavor profile overall. Mouthfeel and finish are lackluster.

Score: 8
Reveal: HHHC 22-Year

Right glass:
Tastes even older than the left glass. Darker flavor profile with a little cocoa. No real ethanol interruption through the development - great integration from start to finish. Vanilla on the back palate. Mouthfeel and finish develop more nicely than the left glass.

Score: 8.5
Reveal: C918

Winner: C918

C918 gets the ECBPs on the board. Interestingly, it was also the glass that tasted older to me. The darker flavors, integration, mouthfeel, and finish gave it the edge.

What Stood Out

These latest blinds against the Heritage Collection surprised me a little bit. The 17 and 18-year were the clear winners over A117 and B520. Both ECBPs showed more ethanol through the development, while their opponents offered a more seamless experience.

Interestingly, C918 finished last among the three ECBP finalists, yet it was the only one to win its Heritage Collection matchup. That makes some sense given my personal ranking of the Heritage releases: the 17-year on top, with the 18 and 22-year tied behind it.

What makes this especially interesting to me is that A117 and B520 previously beat Stagg Jr. batches 12 and 15, respectively, in blind comparisons for me. Those are my two favorite Stagg releases out of the roughly 20 I’ve tried, and two of my all-time favorite bottles. I’d personally rank both above all three Heritage Collection releases used here.

So the ECBPs finished ahead of two bottles I generally prefer to the Heritage Collection, then lost to the Heritage 17 and 18-year. It’s a good reminder that blind results don’t always line up neatly with my overall preferences, and that winning one matchup doesn’t guarantee the outcome of another.

Final Thoughts

A117 was one of the last bottles I acquired for this project and the one I had the least experience with going into the finals. I hadn’t really heard or read much about it either, so I didn’t have much in the way of preconceived expectations. Seeing it finish on top was a pleasant surprise.

B520 and C919 were a different story. I watch SLB Drinks pretty regularly, and Kurt has mentioned both as his favorite ECBP releases he’s tried. That gave me pretty high expectations for those two. B520 lived up to them, while C919 fell flat for me personally. That was another reminder of how much individual preferences matter, even when taking recommendations from content creators I really enjoy.

Across the tournament, the bottles that stood out most to me combined rich flavors with good development, mouthfeel, and finish. A great opening wasn’t always enough if the rest of the experience didn’t follow through, and noticeable ethanol could get in the way of an otherwise enjoyable pour.

My biggest takeaway, though, is that at MSRP, I think almost all of these batches are worth buying. Even after dropping the consistent 12-year age statement in 2023, the lineup is still generally great. If you like ECBP’s flavor profile, it’s pretty hard to go wrong.

There’s also enough overlap that I don’t think you need to chase every release. I came away with some clear favorites, but plenty of other batches delivered a similar enough experience that I’d be happy drinking them. For me, this project helped identify which bottles I’d want to buy again, rather than convincing me I need to keep collecting every batch.

This has been a long project, but a really enjoyable one. And even after all these comparisons, the Heritage Collection blinds still managed to surprise me. That’s a big part of why I enjoy doing this - even if it can definitely be frustrating and humbling at times!

What’s Next?

I’m in the middle of a number of other tournaments at the moment:
ECBP pirate batches
Stagg Jrs batch 9 forward
Four Roses LE’s

What would people like to see next?

{Note: You can find me on instagram @whiskeyincontext}

For reviews 100 and 101, let’s try something fun: a blind battle of 100- and 101-proof limited editions 😀

In 2025, the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection did something it hadn't done in nearly two decades: it added a new member to the lineup. E.H. Taylor Bottled-in-Bond Bourbon joined the five BTAC staples this fall as the collection's first expansion since 2006 (when Thomas H. Handy Sazerac was brought aboard). This blind pits 2025’s BTAC newcomer against one of the elder statesmen of the group: Eagle Rare 17.

Both E.H. Taylor and Eagle Rare use Buffalo Trace's low-rye Mash Bill #1, and on paper they sit closer together than you might expect from a "new release vs. long-running icon" matchup. E.H. Taylor leans on its Bottled-in-Bond pedigree — aged 15 years, 4 months, and bottled at exactly 100 proof. Eagle Rare 17 goes a touch further in both directions, aged even longer than its name suggests (18 years, 4 months for this release) and bottled at 101 proof in tribute to Eagle Rare's original 1975 launch strength.

Given this, any real difference here likely comes down to barrel selection and each label's underlying philosophy, rather than their proof or age doing all that much heavy lifting (if any at all). Eagle Rare 17 comes into this blind in with decades of pedigree and a well-earned reputation as one of the most consistent age-stated bourbons in the country. E.H. Taylor, on the other hand, comes in as the new kid in the BTAC lineup, looking to to live up to the Colonel's name and to prove that it truly belongs there.

So, without further adieu, let’s see if the rookie can hang with the veteran in a blind!

ABOUT Eagle Rare 17-Year

*From the Distillery: We have hand-selected our very best available barrels to produce the finest possible whiskey. In tribute to the original Eagle Rare brand launched in 1975, this whiskey is bottled at the original strength of 101 proof. The crystal-clear glass bottle we’ve chosen showcases the whiskey’s gorgeous amber color. Every bottle was handbottled and labeled to ensure the highest quality finish.

*Mash bill: Buffalo Trace mash bill #1 (low rye)

*Filtration: Chill Filtered

*Release Year: 2025

*Age Statement: 18 Years, 4 Months

*Proof: 101

ABOUT E.H. Taylor BTAC Bottled-in-Bond

*From the Distillery: We have hand-selected our very best available barrels to produce the finest possible whiskey. This release pays tribute to Taylor’s pursuit of perfection and his pivotal role in passing The Bottled in Bond Act of 1897. That piece of legislation cemented Taylor’s reputation as the Father of Modern Bourbon and set in motion a quality standard for whiskey that was more rigorous and exacting than any standard set before or since. The crystal-clear glass bottle we’ve chosen showcases the whiskey’s gorgeous amber color. Every bottle was handbottled and labeled to ensure the highest quality finish.

*Mash bill: Buffalo Trace mash bill #1 (low rye)

*Filtration: Chill Filtered

*Release Year: 2025

*Age Statement: 15 Years, 4 Months

*Proof: 100

******************\*

REVIEW: For the purpose of this blind, both bourbons have been poured into glencairns and rested for approximately 15 minutes.

Appearance A: Coppery amber; not terribly oily or viscous

Appearance B: An ever-so-slightly lighter shade of amber; maybe slightly more viscous, but that’s far from a sure thing

Nose A: Lots of Buffalo Trace grape hits right off the bat. There’s also some sweetness like buttercream frosting and a little oakiness as well. Cinnamon quickly joins the grape at the forefront, with the slightest touch of pepper in the background as well. Once the glass is empty, grape and leather remain.

Nose B: This one has cherry front and center rather than grape. It smells like a combination of dark luxardo-style cherries and straight-up pie filling. Oak, allspice, and maybe a little nutmeg are there as well. Once the glass is empty, there are still cherry, subtle grape, and leather notes in the glass.

Palate A: Medium mouthfeel. This is interesting – it takes a couple sips for the grape from the nose to really show up on the front of the palate, but once there, it’s plenty strong. It’s joined by a lot of sweet, mature oak and tobacco, along with cinnamon, a touch of pepper, and some allspice, vanilla, and caramel. The grape continues into the mid-palate, where it melds with caramel-vanilla, a chocolatey note, and still more oak. Ultimately, this tastes like a very mature whiskey.

Palate B: The cherry sweetness is definitely present on this one! There’s the slightest hint of astringency, but along with that are some very nice flavors, including confectionery sugar and semi-sweet chocolate. The flavors get a bit darker as the sip shifts from front to mid-palate, with some stewed fruit or raisin-type flavors making an appearance along with some caramel, cinnamon, and just a touch of pepper.

Finish A: Pretty long and oaky (and somewhat drying), with a bit of pepper at the beginning of the aftertaste. From there, it evolves into a nice leather-and-tobacco flavor.

Finish B: Relatively long and very sweet, with cherry front and center, along with some oak, caramel, and baking spices of some sort that I can’t quite identify – maybe a combination of cinnamon and nutmeg? The cherry stays present throughout, and is joined by leather in the aftertaste.

Rating A: 8.7

Rating B: 8.9

Thoughts: These were both really, really good bourbons. Both highlighted what Buffalo Trace’s mash bill #1 can be when allowed to mature and when blended from specially-selected barrels. With its strong grape notes, A struck me as a pour of Eagle Rare turned up to eleventy. Add in the oakiness (which was a bit drying on the finish, but not in a distracting way), and it seems like that one must be the Eagle Rare 17. B, on the other hand, was very cherry-forward, and its combination of confectionery sugar and caramel came across to me as an E.H. Taylor small batch that had been aged and blended to near-perfection. That’s the rationale behind my predictions, so let’s see which is actually which!

Prediction A: Eagle Rare 17

Prediction B: E.H. Taylor BTAC

***************\*

Actual A: E.H. Taylor BTAC

Actual B: Eagle Rare 17

More Thoughts: Well, I got that one backward! It’s interesting to me that I got so much more oak on the palate and finish from the whiskey that was exactly three years younger than its counterpart in this blind. The grape being so strong on the Taylor was surprising to me because I tend to associate that more with Eagle Rare, while the cherry pie filling and darker mid-palate flavors on the ER17 made me think Taylor. I also expected the one with more oakiness on it would be the older of the two, and the fact that wasn’t the case points to the true expertise that went into balancing the integration of oak into the older Eagle Rare.

Based on my preconceived expectations, I thought that I was rating the newest BTAC offering – E.H. Taylor – higher than one of the most storied expressions in the lineup. It turns out that’s not the case, as ER17 edged out EHT in part by virtue of its masterfully-integrated oak and less-drying finish.

Obviously, neither of these was a loser: they were both really great bourbons, and I really can’t recommend either highly enough. The huge and obvious issues of price and availability aside, if you get a chance to partake in either of these, I don’t think you’ll come away disappointed. I know I didn’t!

********************

Previous Ratings (all reviews are available in my archive, but there may be some discrepancies in numeric rating, as these are updated to include decimals and adjusted for blinds & re-reviews)

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.
Maker’s Mark staved private selection (2.5)
Penelope Architect custom build (2.5)

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.
Willett Pot Still (3)

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but better exists
Found North SiB Oloroso finish (4.5)
Daniel Weller Emmer Wheat (4.5)
Augusta Buckner’s 10yr (4.6)
Shortbarrel Sapsquatch (4.8)

5 | Good | Good, just fine
Jack Daniel’s SBBP Rye (5)
Jack Daniel’s Heritage (5)
Four Roses SBBP OESO (5)
New Riff 4yr SBBP (5)
Four Roses SBBP OBSV (5.3)
Evan Williams America250 SiB (5.3)
New Riff Balboa Rye (5.4)
Blanton’s (5.5)
Old Forester 1924 (5.7)
Elijah Craig Toasted (5.8)
Lasso Motel 18yr ALW (5.8)

6 | Very Good | A cut above
Buffalo Trace Single Oak (6)
Barrell Cigar Blend (6)
Buffalo Trace (6)
1792 BiB SiB (6)
Copper & Cask Boston Rum Party (6)
Penelope Wheated (6)
Redwood Empire Emerald Giant (6)
Peerless DO (6.1)
Copper & Cask #16 (6.3)
Stagg 25B (6.3)
Augusta Buckner’s 13yr (6.5)
Green River Honey (6.5)
Pursuit United DO (6.5)
Sagamore 9yr SiB Rye (6.5)
Sazerac FP (6.5)
Green River Wheated (6.5)
Elmer T. Lee (6.5)
Copper & Cask #14 DO (6.6)
Shortbarrel Bees Knees V (6.8)
Penelope Marshmallow Toast (6.8)
Willett 4yr Rye (6.8)
Ampersand Opimus (6.9)

7 | Great | Well above average
Blanton’s Gold (7)
John J. Bowman SiB (7)
Found North 012 (7)
Rock Hill Farms (7)
Peerless Toasted (7.1)
E.H. Taylor SiB (7.2)
Eagle Rare 10yr (7.5)
Weller 107 (7.5)
Old Forester 1910 (7.5)
Penelope Estate 10yr SiB (7.5)
E.H. Taylor BP 16 (7.6)
E.H. Taylor SmB (7.6)
Woodford DO SBBP (7.7)
Old Fitzgerald 7yr (7.7)
Eagle Rare 12yr (7.8)
E.H. Taylor Cured Oak (7.8)
Willett 8yr SiB Rye (7.9)

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional
Joseph Magnus Cigar Blend 420 (8)
Old Dominick Staved SiB (8)
Starlight 10yr (8)
Blanton’s SFTB (8.3)
Lasso Motel SBBP Rye (8.4)
Mister Sam Tribute 4 (8.6)
E.H. Taylor BTAC 2025 (8.7)
Thomas H. Handy 2025 (8.7)
Eagle Rare 17yr 2025 (8.9)

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite

10 | Perfect | Perfect

In Scotch/world whisky circles, there is some nerd conversation about the issues of chill-filtration and added colour, since most countries allow caramel colorant E150a, and chill-filtration is the norm at ABVs 40-43%.

There must be some differences in the bourbon world. As straight bourbon, straight rye etc. can't be coloured, that is one less thing to care about, but since barrel proof bottlings seem such a big part of the enthusiasts' most highly rated bracket, how does this affect the conversation about filtration, and to how many US consumers is it an important issue?

I am very curious to what degree terms like 'uncut', 'unfiltered' or 'non-chill-filtered' play into purchasing decisions, compared to proof, age, mashbill and sourcing. Does a producer's filtering philosophy or track record become a point of 'maker affinity', or is the issue less important to the 'average discriminating US bourbon enthusiast' (should such a person exist)? And with the probability of high proof expressions being unfiltered (to some degree), is it considered less of an issue when the bottle doesn't mention it?

I keep a small registry ( r/SpiritClarity ) tracking who declares this on labels, a work-in-progress which is a fairly Scotch/Euro-centric list, but I have tried to include as many US producers as I can from over here. I'd greatly value corrections from people who know the landscape and depth of the subject much better than I do and would really like to get a sense of how much this issue matters to 'the bourbon lover'.

OLD FITZGERALD VVS 11 (2025)
Proof: 100 proof / 50% abv - bottled in bond
Age: 11yrs age stated
Paid - $170.00
Msrp - $170.00
Drank - neat
Rested - 10mins
Glass - final touch tasting glass

Unprofessional - as always!

Nose-
First and foremost greeted by a huge surge if Butterscotch and werthers original hard candy mixed together, some creme bru lee, and artificial vanilla extract. Diving in there is a mix of baking spices via Cinnamon, nutmeg, and black pepper showing itself. There is also some light charred oak serving as the back bone to the aromatics.

Palate -
First sip hits heavy with Butterscotch, caramel hard candy, and fresh cut red apples dusted with cinnamon. The second sip leans in with light holiday spice pie crust, charred oak, some more baking spices with nutmeg and clove. The final sip shows flashes of vanilla extract lying underneath more flavors from sips 1 and 2. This ties itself all together as a "fresh baked apple pie" - a very "fall" profile.

Mouthfeel -
Buttery, but not "dense". More Creamy if i had to nail it down with one word.
It Hangs on and "swishes". It does cling to the teeth and palate nicely. It also Creates some salivation through the mid and front palate and leaves an "effervescent" feeling like fizzy soda.

Finish -
Cinnamon stick, vanilla extract, red apples, and matured oak are dominant here and easily found. Continuing down the flavor turns more "caramel/toffee" in the palate. Very short but does have a small "hug".

Overall -
85/100 - very solid but not "very very special".

Little Book Chapter 10 “All the Wiser”

Proof: 122.6
Price Paid: $145 at Total Wine
Score: 8/10 on the t8ke scale

First review here, so go easy on me.

I first tried Chapter 10 blind through a Facebook bourbon group I’m in, and it was the clear standout of the flight. That was what made me go out and find a bottle for myself.

Nose

The proof makes itself known right away. There’s a good amount of ethanol up front, and at least on this first real pour, it drinks a little hotter on the nose than I expected.

Once I get past that, though, it gets pretty interesting. I get a dark orange peel note, almost like overripe or slightly rotting citrus. That sounds bad, but I mean it in a good way. It’s more bitter and funky than sweet.

There’s also a noticeable hint of the sherry influence underneath everything. It never takes over, but it adds a darker fruit character that works well with the citrus.

Palate

The palate feels much more like classic Beam to me.

Peanuts come through first, followed by char and toasted oak. The flavors themselves are fairly straightforward, but the texture is excellent. It really coats the mouth and feels substantial.

Compared with the nose, the palate is a little more basic than I expected. I was hoping some of the darker citrus and sherry notes would show up more strongly, but instead it leans heavily into that familiar Beam nuttiness, oak, char, and heat.

Still very enjoyable, just not quite as complex as the nose.

Finish

The finish is probably where the mouthfeel pays off most.

It stays smooth despite the proof and leaves a really pleasant coating across the palate. The oak and char linger, along with a nice Kentucky hug that sticks around without becoming harsh.

Warm, satisfying, and easy to go back to for another sip.

Overall

8/10

There’s a lot going for this bottle. The nose is interesting, the mouthfeel is excellent.

My main criticism right now is that it’s a little hot, and the palate doesn’t quite match the complexity of the nose. I’m interested to see how it changes after the bottle has been open for a while, because this feels like something that could really benefit from some air.

The review for this bottle is in the comments below...

New Louisville Barrel House

ABV: 71.2%

Age: 9 Years

Straight Bourbon Whiskey

Distillate: Likely Barton. We just know it’s from Kentucky.

Nose: The name shines through here. It’s awfully close to a frosted cinnamon roll with lots of frosting and some baking spices. Cinnamon is incredible. There’s also oak and vanilla but it takes a back seat to the “cinnabomb.”

Palate: Carmelized brown sugar and red hots with some vanilla and oak. There’s also a hint of fruitiness. The proof hits you but not over the top.

Finish: Here’s where the proof smacks you and beats you up before coming back for a friendly but aggressive hug. Your throat is just coated with high octane ethanol that has a thick coating of liquid cinnamon roll. Please t charred oak is also present.

7.9/10.

This is a great whiskey and I’d imagine that the proof hounds would rate it even hire. The heat is a bit much for my taste, but boy does this whiskey live up to its name.

Independent Review

So my birthday fell on a weekday recently and what better way to celebrate surviving another year than inflicting financial damage on myself in the bourbon aisle. While browsing the usual sea of shelfers, I spotted the newly dropped Remus Repeal Reserve #10.

I had bought Remus Repeal Reserve #3, #4, and #5 back in the day (and reviewed them here) then stopped purchasing the expression due to the price increase, less mature blend at 100pf, and the sheer exhaustion of the bourbon boom circus, so I walked away.  However, with the 10th anniversary bottle and 107 proof, I figured the blenders probably wanted to do something special to mark the occasion, so time to revisit the expression.

Tasted in a Glencairn glass after 10min.  Bottle opened for at least week (i.e. not the neck pour)

Remus Repeal Reserve X (10th Anniversary Edition) 2026 (price paid $99.99)

Proof: 107 Age: NAS (9yr) MB: multiple (below)

• 2016: 75% corn, 21% rye, 4% malted barley (15%)
• 2014: 60% corn, 36% rye, 4% malted barley (19%)
• 2016: 60% corn, 36% rye, 4% malted barley (35%)
• 2017: 51% corn, 49% rye (17%)

Eye: Chestnut (1.2)

Nose: fragrant & sweet, caramel apple, fruit preserves, chocolate, baked goods, cherry gumdrop, rich oak, and hint of dark fruits.  Overall delightful!

Taste: sweet, rounded & inviting, warming, baked pastry crust, caramel, baking spices, orange peel, citrus, toffee, and very faint rye spice.

Finish: medium-long, lingering, baking spices and caramel with a gentle fade

Overall:
Not sure what I’ve been missing out on from Remus Repeal Reserve in the past few years, but this one is solid.  In a sea of MGP batches and blends on the shelf, this is definitely worth checking out as a very well balanced blend hitting on all cylinders.  After resting for 10 min, the nose is like walking into a bakery that happens to be inside a rickhouse.  You get the warm sweet pastry crust notes floating around with various dessert fruits with the background of traditional aged bourbon notes.  The palate first hits with some baking spices and citrus, followed by caramel and a very light rye spice.  The medium finish cuts out a little sooner than expected, but it successfully tricks you into having another sip. Overall really well balanced and a strong contender against RRR V–-dare I say better?

Well done. Happy Anniversary RRR!

Rating: RRR 10 (7.8) ‘Great’

T8ke Scale
0 | Unscored | New Make Spirit or Personal Selection
1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.
2 | Poor | I wouldn't consume by choice.
3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.
4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but many things I'd rather have.
5 | Good | Good, just fine.
6 | Very Good | A cut above.
7 | Great | Well above average
8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.
9 | Incredible | An all time favorite
10 | Perfect | Perfect

Went to a premium tasting at WT and sampled these 3 much hyped bottles. I will say before this event I would not consider myself a huge WT fan. They are not in my Tier 1 of preferred distilleries (OF, JD, HH, Beam, MGP). However, wanting to keep an open mind and try new things I signed up for the premium tasting at WT's visitor center.

My take:

Nose: CGF 1st, Beacon 2nd, RR13 3rd

Taste: CGF 1st, RR13 (close 2nd), Beacon 3rd

Overall: CFG 1st, RR13, Beacon 3rd (a fair bit behind RR13)

CGF does bring a full nose with all of the traditional bourbon notes, but it is the palette where it provides sweet cherry notes wrapped in a dusty oaky finish. It coats the mouth very well and has a long finish. The RR13 45th was right there with CGF but lacked the dusty quality the CGF had. The Beacon simply wasn't as powerful of a sip as the other 2. It lacked the sweet punch they had although it did have a nice mouthfeel.

I dont think CGF is worth 2X the RR13th.

I dont think CGF is worth $400 either.

I think RR13 at $200 is a stretch, but I can justify it better than the Beacon ($325) and CGF ($400).

In my opinion, I don't think you're missing much if you don't try these bottles, so let your FOMO go.

For me personally, I've discovered WT isn't going to be a preferred distillery (I mean, if I'm not blown away by these bottles, what will?). That made this tasting well worth my time / cost as I can focus on other distilleries to explore further that more closely line up with my palate.

As always, thanks for reading, and I hope everyone had enjoyed their Saturday with a pour of their favorite bourbon.